Gentoo Archives: gentoo-embedded

From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o>
To: gentoo-embedded@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-embedded] glibc+iconv
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 19:01:50
Message-Id: 201110141501.17986.vapier@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-embedded] glibc+iconv by Sergey Mironov
On Friday 14 October 2011 06:11:40 Sergey Mironov wrote:
> 2011/10/14 Mike Frysinger: > > On Thursday 13 October 2011 19:30:14 Sergey Mironov wrote: > >> 2011/10/14 Mike Frysinger: > >> > On Thursday 13 October 2011 15:15:40 Sergey Mironov wrote: > >> >> Hello. I have my arm-unknown-linux-gnueabi system which uses glibc > >> >> and busybox. Recently I realised that iconv program doesn't exist in > >> >> the tree. I've compared host's and target's glibc file lists and > >> >> found that arm's version doesn't install anything to > >> >> /usr/arm-unknown-linux-gnueabi/usr/bin. What can be the cause of > >> >> this? Small C program shows that iconv_open function returns error > >> >> code just like if there is no iconv at all. How shoud I make arm's > >> >> iconv work? > >> > > >> > see glibc's files/eblits/src_compile.eblit: > >> > is_crosscompile && sed -i '1ibuild-programs = no' config.make > >> > > >> > i imagine disabling that line will get you `iconv` > >> > >> Thanks, I will try it! Am I understand correctly that iconv itself > >> (library, not program) is a part of glibc and it is not possible to > >> exclude it during the build? So despite the lack of program I should > >> still have fully functional library. > > > > your understanding is correct, however ........ > > > > iconv() is part of glibc but it relies on all of the gconv shared libs > > found in /usr/$CTARGET/usr/lib/gconv/ to do its actually work. which we > > also incidentally delete when building the cross-compiler glibc (see > > src_install.eblit and look for "gconv"). > > > > you aren't the first person to find this behavior undesirable, and when i > > implemented it, it was more of "let's save space on things i don't think > > anyone will use". but if people are using it, then installing these > > things probably makes sense. > > Well, maybe I really want something strange. I guess, people often > install another, non-cross-compiled version of glibc on top of initial > one. I've tried to do so, but found that cross-emerge complains about > conflicts - it simply doesn't treat initial glibc as a package > installed on target. I saw 2 ways - either edit package.provided and > don't install new glibc or disable conflicts detection and overwrite > some target's /lib* and /usr/lib/* files. I've chosen first way since > I am afraid of getting a mess of two glibc's compiled with different > tools. But how do you (or other people) act in this situation?
indeed, this is the current wonky behavior. i guess the thing to do would be two fold: - remove the disabling of tools/supplemental files so the cross-compiler glibc has all the same files as sys-libs/glibc - have crossdev automatically add a package.provided entry to the /usr/$CTARGET/etc/ tree for sys-libs/glibc
> By the way, I also had to handcopy libstdc++.so from > /usr/lib/gcc/$CTARGET to /usr/$CTARGET/lib to make C++ programs work. > It is another thing which makes me thinking of installig full glibc on > top of cross-one.
yes, the /usr/$CTARGET tree has no gcc files installed at all. in native installs, we've got /etc/env.d/ which adds the internal gcc paths via LDPATH to ld.so.conf, and then ldso at runtime finds libstdc++.so and friends. but gcc is not installed at all in /usr/$CTARGET. in this case, you should be able to emerge gcc into /usr/$CTARGET since none of the cross-compiler gcc files should be in there ... -mike

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-embedded] glibc+iconv Sergey Mironov <ierton@×××××.com>